Global urban forest cover and nature access is insufficient for human wellbeing and worsening
- 1The Nature Conservancy
Abstract
Target 12 of the Global Biodiversity Framework urges governments to enhance human access to nature to improve human wellbeing. Here, we study nature access using several metrics for a globally representative sample of 140 large Functional Urban Areas, examining variation among regions and over time. We find most urbanites globally do not reach common benchmarks for urban forest cover and nature access. Globally, 3.3 billion people (76% of urbanites) live in urban areas that do not have at least 30% tree canopy cover. Moreover, 1.1 billion people (23% of urbanites) are farther than 1 km from a park as identified in Open Street Map, and 1.5 billion people (36% of all urbanites) are more than 1 km from a green patch as defined by land cover. Over time, urban nature access has declined. Between 1992 and 2020, most urban residents had an increase in the distance to green patches (63% of urbanites increased, average increase 680 m). Similarly, between 1992 and 2020, 31% of urbanites had a decrease in percent natural cover, while only 1.3% had an increase. We show that the variation among cities or regions in the amount of nature access depends on the metric used and the context. On average, mesic climates have more tree cover than do arid climates, and cities with lower GDP or higher population density tend to have lower natural share than other cities. Our results suggest that global urban nature access is insufficient for supporting human health and worsening over time.
Related
- Remote sensing and the EU nature restoration Regulation: monitoring biodiversity indicators for integrated forest management
- How does supervisor support shape PhD students’ learning experience? Evidence from the Nature Careers 2025 Global PhD Survey
- Potential exposure risk of global timber production, carbon stocking, and biodiversity to forest pests
- A global assessment reveals widespread co-benefits for forest protection
- Global Quantitative Review of Container Effects on Nursery Growth and Field Survival in Forest Seedlings
BibTeX
@misc{mcdonald2026global,
title = {{Global urban forest cover and nature access is insufficient for human wellbeing and worsening}},
author = {R. I. McDonald and M. I. Marsagishvili and L. Seegmiller and P. Olsson},
howpublished = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.10.750750},
url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.10.750750v1},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Global urban forest cover and nature access is insufficient for human wellbeing and worsening
AU - R. I. McDonald
AU - M. I. Marsagishvili
AU - L. Seegmiller
AU - P. Olsson
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/10
PB - bioRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.09.10.750750
UR - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.10.750750v1
AB - Target 12 of the Global Biodiversity Framework urges governments to enhance human access to nature to improve human wellbeing. Here, we study nature access using several metrics for a globally representative sample of 140 large Functional Urban Areas, examining variation among regions and over time. We find most urbanites globally do not reach common benchmarks for urban forest cover and nature access. Globally, 3.3 billion people (76% of urbanites) live in urban areas that do not have at least 30% tree canopy cover. Moreover, 1.1 billion people (23% of urbanites) are farther than 1 km from a park as identified in Open Street Map, and 1.5 billion people (36% of all urbanites) are more than 1 km from a green patch as defined by land cover. Over time, urban nature access has declined. Between 1992 and 2020, most urban residents had an increase in the distance to green patches (63% of urbanites increased, average increase 680 m). Similarly, between 1992 and 2020, 31% of urbanites had a decrease in percent natural cover, while only 1.3% had an increase. We show that the variation among cities or regions in the amount of nature access depends on the metric used and the context. On average, mesic climates have more tree cover than do arid climates, and cities with lower GDP or higher population density tend to have lower natural share than other cities. Our results suggest that global urban nature access is insufficient for supporting human health and worsening over time.
ER -